Two months ago, a petition bearing more than 110,000 signatures was delivered to The Washington Post demanding a ban on any article questioning global warming. The petition arrived the day before publication of my column, which consisted of precisely that heresy.The column ran as usual. But I was gratified by the show of intolerance because it perfectly illustrated my argument that the l...

Much of the driver behind this totalitarian approach is the total lack of statesmanship at the very top. Obama encourages this through his own hateful speech. The reality is, he should also resign for the exact same reason the CEO of Mozilla was forced out.

Not worth the exegesis ... ! Then why go on and on about it? Many of these author's arguments can be used against the author.

If people want to share their beliefs then they better be prepared to hear the beliefs of others. And what need is there for all of these judgments anyways? It's like a cat make-believing that it is jumping and then feeling sheepish when it falls on its face... except that without any feedback a person can day-dream about falling on their face feeling somehow other than it would in RL.

I try not to share my beliefs in case they might be unpopular; duh, way of the world.

When was the last time the post printed a story about how flat the earth is? Because it isn't.That's why they shouldn't print stories denying global warming. Course Krauthammer is a typically paranoid right winger who thinks his rights are being taken away when in reality, he is just an person.

Awww, poor little tweedums. Yes, anti-scientific nonsense needs to get even MORE of a platform in our "liberal media", which thinks "both sides" need to be presented for every issue, even if one of those sides engages in constant lying and/or is just simply wrong.

With that in mind, why can't these people get some more airtime every time these topics come up:

1. Gravity is just a theory, why can't the intelligent falling people get their say? 2. Flat Earth Society needs to be given equal time every time. Those guys at Google Earth and other such services cannot push conformity and the hegemony of their globe onto us!3. Geocentrists. We need to get a rep from the Galileo Was Wrong group any time this business about the earth revolving around the sun comes up. 4. Moon landing - every time that comes up, there needs to be at least a disclaimer in the form of "some people say..."5. Same goes for the Holocaust. Equal time to alternative history people.

After all, it's ONLY 95% of the relevant scientists that support global warming, and ONLY 97% of the papers published support global warming. The other 5%, as well as any unqualified kook, needs to get equal time with that 95%. It only makes sense.

FrozenFlower wrote:Not worth the exegesis ... ! Then why go on and on about it? Many of these author's arguments can be used against the author.

If people want to share their beliefs then they better be prepared to hear the beliefs of others. And what need is there for all of these judgments anyways? It's like a cat make-believing that it is jumping and then feeling sheepish when it falls on its face... except that without any feedback a person can day-dream about falling on their face feeling somehow other than it would in RL.

I try not to share my beliefs in case they might be unpopular; duh, way of the world.

I think Dunning-Kruger actually predicts that those doing the mental equivalent of finger-painting really think they are doing the mental equivalent of Michelangelo's work, and get upset when others point out that's not the case.

GoneGalt wrote:Much of the driver behind this totalitarian approach is the total lack of statesmanship at the very top. Obama encourages this through his own hateful speech. The reality is, he should also resign for the exact same reason the CEO of Mozilla was forced out.

Yeah, reality is Obama's fault.

And conservatives should never, ever be held to account for holding views that are simply wrong in the science department or for supporting bigotry.

Take, for example, denier Dr Richard Lindzen, who when asked by a BBC journalist about which descriptive term he preferred, said: “I actually like ‘denier.’ That’s closer than skeptic”. (Six months before this interview, Lindzen had claimed the opposite, saying he was offended by the term.) It seems important in this context to point out that Dr Lindzen is Jewish.

Or there’s also denier Steve Milloy, who told Popular Science that: “I'm happy to be a denier.”

Lawrence Solomon, a prominent Canadian columnist, has written a climate book with the title “The Deniers” based on a series of columns he wrote, also called “The Deniers”.

But will Krauty disown Roy Spencer, who thinks climate realists should be called "Nazis"? Or would Krauty prefer we overlook that?

If sex discrimination is "illegal" then why is there so much sex discrimination in rights and pay. What is Krauthammmer and his Conservative supporters suggesting to do about this discrepancy all the while acting as if it it someone else's problem? If the nation's average is 77% on the dollar for this wage difference then how can Obama paying his female staff 88% on the dollar be considered a negative? I call that an improvement and would say Obama is trying to make a difference while seeing that the pay scale is going up. Only in Krauthammer's world are improvements something to be discouraged and even stopped. He dwells in the past and relishes keeping his Status Quo intact.

Take, for example, denier Dr Richard Lindzen, who when asked by a BBC journalist about which descriptive term he preferred, said: “I actually like ‘denier.’ That’s closer than skeptic”. (Six months before this interview, Lindzen had claimed the opposite, saying he was offended by the term.) It seems important in this context to point out that Dr Lindzen is Jewish.

Or there’s also denier Steve Milloy, who told Popular Science that: “I'm happy to be a denier.”

Lawrence Solomon, a prominent Canadian columnist, has written a climate book with the title “The Deniers” based on a series of columns he wrote, also called “The Deniers”.

But will Krauty disown Roy Spencer, who thinks climate realists should be called "Nazis"? Or would Krauty prefer we overlook that?

Extra irony? These people often whine about the "grievance industry". Seems to me that is all Faux, hate radio, and people like Krauthammer do is engage in made-up grievances.

The extremist propagandist Krauthammer is predictable with his reliably empty, disingenuous, deflecting and dishonest 'arguments'.

There is no 'debate' about global warming: there is scientific fact and there is political theater. Guess which side Krauthammer is on? There is no 'debate' on gay marriage either, if you're paying attention to the law. You are free to discriminate according to your religion in your own private life but you cannot discriminate according to the law. Extremists like Krauthammer actually understand this so they fall back on the whine that 'liberals' refuse to debate. Such nonsense. 2+2=4. There is no debate. The law is clear. The science is clear.

When will conservatives realize (and the Post, please) that 'pundits' like Krauthammer and his minor-league wannabe Rosen are only in it for the money. They'll tell you the moon is made of cheese if enough people want to believe that and will pay them to say so.

gglaurson@msn.com wrote:If sex discrimination is "illegal" then why is there so much sex discrimination in rights and pay. What is Krauthammmer and his Conservative supporters suggesting to do about this discrepancy all the while acting as if it it someone else's problem? If the nation's average is 77% on the dollar for this wage difference then how can Obama paying his female staff 88% on the dollar be considered a negative? I call that an improvement and would say Obama is trying to make a difference while seeing that the pay scale is going up. Only in Krauthammer's world are improvements something to be discouraged and even stopped. He dwells in the past and relishes keeping his Status Quo intact.

You are a tool for misinformation. The 77cent has been debunked and is not accurate. Obama is talking out both side of his mouth. The fact remains that there is a difference, but putting more federal regulations and intrusions on small businesses is not the answer. Follow existing law and quit using women as political pawns. If Obama is going to blame republicans, he should get his own house in order. Partisan true believers, such as yourself, should hold him accountable, but you don't have the morals to do it.

Like the CEO of Mozilla who resigned under pressure just 10 days into his job when it was disclosed that six years earlier he had donated to California's Proposition 8, which defined marriage as between a man and a woman.

What is so unfortunate is that the CEO of Mozilla went ahead and resigned. I would have preferred that he fight it all the way, particularly since he had done nothing wrong. It is o.k. to have strongly held values and to express them through one's legal actions.

What adherents of The Left fail to grapple with and to recognize is the principle of the issue at hand. They are in power...for now. When the time comes and the political pendulum swings the other way, have they stopped to imagine the precedence that their side is setting, and what their own personal ramifications will be when The Right holds power?

It is the principle of the issue which matters. I do not want to see our great nation evolve much more in the direction of which scenarios described by Mr. Krauthammer exist.

I don't always agree with Krauthammer (or Krugman or Rosen or Dionne or...) but I am never afraid of his (their) opinions... and as a staunch advocate for a robust 1st Amendment, I believe dissension and argument to be necessary pillars of a healthy and robust democracy.

Apparently, others here don't share that belief and insist on continuing to make Krauthammer's point for him!

gglaurson@msn.com wrote:If sex discrimination is "illegal" then why is there so much sex discrimination in rights and pay. What is Krauthammmer and his Conservative supporters suggesting to do about this discrepancy all the while acting as if it it someone else's problem? If the nation's average is 77% on the dollar for this wage difference then how can Obama paying his female staff 88% on the dollar be considered a negative? I call that an improvement and would say Obama is trying to make a difference while seeing that the pay scale is going up. Only in Krauthammer's world are improvements something to be discouraged and even stopped. He dwells in the past and relishes keeping his Status Quo intact.

You are a tool for misinformation. The 77cent has been debunked and is not accurate. Obama is talking out both side of his mouth. The fact remains that there is a difference, but putting more federal regulations and intrusions on small businesses is not the answer. Follow existing law and quit using women as political pawns. If Obama is going to blame republicans, he should get his own house in order. Partisan true believers, such as yourself, should hold him accountable, but you don't have the morals to do it.

...and quit using women as political pawns.

Great line. The Left has so many pawns: gays, women, Palestinians, Muslims, baby seals, warm weather, cold weather, etc. Pawns is all that any of are to that party. Question anything of their ideology and one becomes the enemy, even if all one does is ask the question. You can clearly see this in play with most of the comments on this forum, ridiculing Mr. Krauthammer rather than addressing the principle of silencing "deniers" (i.e., those who question The Left's ideology) and the power that the silencing brings to the ruling class.

Take, for example, denier Dr Richard Lindzen, who when asked by a BBC journalist about which descriptive term he preferred, said: “I actually like ‘denier.’ That’s closer than skeptic”. (Six months before this interview, Lindzen had claimed the opposite, saying he was offended by the term.) It seems important in this context to point out that Dr Lindzen is Jewish.

Or there’s also denier Steve Milloy, who told Popular Science that: “I'm happy to be a denier.”

Lawrence Solomon, a prominent Canadian columnist, has written a climate book with the title “The Deniers” based on a series of columns he wrote, also called “The Deniers”.

But will Krauty disown Roy Spencer, who thinks climate realists should be called "Nazis"? Or would Krauty prefer we overlook that?

Extra irony? These people often whine about the "grievance industry". Seems to me that is all Faux, hate radio, and people like Krauthammer do is engage in made-up grievances.

And exactly who are you to decide if someone should feel aggrieved or not?

Fascism much?

Meanwhile complaints about the "grievance industry" is directed more at the industry than the grievance. Too many liberals use other peoples' grief to advance themselves and their ideology.